- 153-
territories of Simeon and Dan have no boundary mark, only a register of cities, because
they really formed part of the territories of Judah and Ephraim. Lastly, the defectiveness
in the description of the other tribal lots arises from so much of the country being still in
the hands of the Canaanites. It is evident that such a register could not have dated from
a later period, when the tribes were in full possession, but must be the original register
of Joshua.
(^136) Even these words (14:12): "Now therefore give me this mountain, where of Jehovah
spake in that day;" do not necessarily imply that that "mountain" was actually assigned
to Caleb on "that day."
(^137) It is difficult to arrive at a certain conclusion, whether at Kadesh districts were
actually assigned to Caleb and to Joshua, or to Caleb alone, or whether the choice of
districts was accorded to both, or to one of them. The reader will infer our conclusion
from the text.
(^138) "Caleb, the son of Jephunneh the Kenazite," that is, a son of Kenaz, who was a
descendant of Hezron, the son of Pharez, a grandson of Judah (1 Chronicles 2:5, 18).
The name "Kenaz" seems to have been rather marked in the family, as it recurs again
later, 1 Chronicles 4:15. Caleb was the chieftain or head of one of "the houses of
fathers" in Judah, and to the presence of this his "house" - not of the whole tribe - refer
the words (Joshua 14:6): "Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua."
(^139) In this sense the words must be understood (Joshua 14:7): "I brought word again, as
it was in mine heart," that is, according to my conscientious conviction. Similarly the
expression (ver. 8): "but I wholly followed the Lord," means, that his allegiance to the
Lord was not shaken either by the evil report of the other spies, or by the murmuring
and threatening of the people.
(^140) It seems to have taken place after the death of Joshua, and is recorded in Judges 1:11,
etc.
(^141) It is not easy to decide whether Othniel was the son of Kenaz, who was a younger
brother of Caleb, or whether he was himself Caleb's younger brother (Judges 3:9). The
punctuation of the Masorethists is in favor of the latter view, nor was the marriage of an
uncle with his niece contrary to the Mosaic law.
(^142) Two other critical remarks may here find a place. 1. Our present Hebrew text seems
incomplete between Joshua 15:59 and 60. Here the LXX. insert, no doubt from a more
perfect MS., a list of other eleven cities, among them Bethlehem. 2. The closing notice
of ver. 63 helps us to fix the date of the Book of Joshua.
(^)